Political parties are in the business of preserving power and aggrandizing it when possible. At the state level, one of the principal tools they use is the gerrymander to draw political districts to the advantage of whichever party happens to be in power. That's the way the political game is played in Texas and most states. Democrats did it in the Lone Star State for decades. Since the 2002 GOP takeover of the Legislature, Republicans have done it.

In fact, a key objective of GOP leaders in the 78th Legislature in 2003 was to replace one partisan congressional redistricting plan with another unprecedented, mid-decade, partisan congressional redistricting plan.

Now Texas is embroiled in another redistricting saga, this one scheduled. Republicans, who scored historic gains in the 2010 election, naturally are trying to protect those victories. To the surprise of few observers, two different panels of three federal judges - each with two judges appointed by Republican presidents - ruled that GOP-inspired maps for congressional and state House and Senate districts adversely affect minority representation.

Related Stories

Judges have redrawn those maps, as they did in 2004 and 2006, when parts of the 2003 redistricting map were determined to have violated the Voting Rights Act. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott objects to federal judges, who are not elected, having an expansive role in redistricting. Abbott is seeking a summary decision from the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the judicial panel's redistricting map, which redraws even districts about which there were no complaints.

The irony is that if elected officials had carried out their redistricting duties with respect for the law rather than with the goal of maximizing GOP wins, there would be no need for judicial intervention.

In the words of one of the two judicial panels, "The state of Texas used an improper standard or methodology to determine which districts afford minority voters the ability to elect their preferred candidates of choice."

There's a better way to conduct redistricting. Eleven states have bipartisan or nonpartisan commissions composed of non-office-holding citizens.

Sen. Jeff Wentworth, R-San Antonio, has in every session since 1993 introduced legislation to create a redistricting commission in Texas. Each time, his legislation has failed.

Under Wentworth's proposal, GOP and Democratic lawmakers would each select four commission members, none of them elected or party officials. Commission members would select a ninth, nonvoting presiding officer.

With the power to draw lines evenly distributed, compromise in favor of voters would be essential. In previous versions of Wentworth's measure, the chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court would appoint a ninth member to break a tie. The Legislature would then have a straight up-or-down vote on the commission's product.

Redistricting maps that emanate from such a process have a much higher likelihood of passing muster with the Justice Department and the judiciary. They'd also better reflect the interests of voters and would spare Texas the spectacle of a redistricting showdown in the courtroom.